Perceived stress and performance of daily activities among emergency healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers were exposed to intense stress in the emergency departments and sudden changes in their daily lives.ObjectiveThe study aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on performance and participation in the activities of daily living, personal lives, and overall well-being of the healthcare workers in an emergency department.MethodsSeventy-eight people working in an emergency department of a university hospital (100% of those eligible) participated in the study during June-July 2022. A self-report survey, cross-sectional design was used to collect data. Participants completed the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS) and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Independent sample t-tests, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression analysis were used for statistical analysis.ResultsThere was a significant negative correlation between PSS and COPM Performance (r = -0.524) as well as between PSS and COPM Satisfaction (r = -0.508), indicating that higher levels of stress were associated with lower performance and satisfaction. In addition, work-related factors, including working experience, daily working hours, and time available for rest at work, were significantly associated with PSS, COPM Performance, and Satisfaction (p < 0.05). The strongest multivariate associations (p = 0.001) were found between lacking time to rest at work and PSS (direct) and COPM Performance and Satisfaction (inverse).ConclusionThe stress experienced by emergency healthcare workers during COVID-19 negatively impacted their performance, daily activities, personal lives, and well-being. A potential implication is that policy-makers addressing work-related factors and implementing regulations could improve the well-being of these workers in their professional practices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".